Atari v Commodore

[TMR]

Please listen to this one (real stuff is strongly recommended, alternatively Atari800WinPLus 4.0 final but expect partial lack of quality) and you may start to wonder how is it done.

 

Presumably some of the quality comes from throwing shedloads of CPU grind at it and turning the screen off... but i'm not a sound person, it sounds good to me but only minimally clearer than the first real part of

(starts at 0:50) and that has the screen enabled and other things going on that require the CPU simultaneously.

[atariksi]

Please listen to this one (real stuff is strongly recommended, alternatively Atari800WinPLus 4.0 final but expect partial lack of quality) and you may start to wonder how is it done.

 

Presumably some of the quality comes from throwing shedloads of CPU grind at it and turning the screen off... but i'm not a sound person, it sounds good to me but only minimally clearer than the first real part of

(starts at 0:50) and that has the screen enabled and other things going on that require the CPU simultaneously.

 

You are one of the most biased people I know. I can play 15Khz sampled audio with screen on and using a simple IRQ w/plenty of CPU time available for downloading video frames through the joystick port. Your SID dies out in trying since your joystick port and CPU are bigger bottlenecks and single DAC vs. four doesn't help either.

[atariksi]

Well, earlier in the thread you were claiming Atari came and told you there's no multicolor player stuff so that argument would go against that one.

 

That's not what i said at all, the point i made was that you were using two hardware sprites (two as defined by Atari's own documentation and the hardware itself having a set of registers for each sprite regardless of what mode it's in) to generate a single multicolour object which you were then comparing to one hardware sprite on the C64. i'm surprised that anybody can see that as a fair comparison.

...

 

And I disproved you with examples of bitplanes and this link: http://www.atariarchives.org/c1bag/page192.php which talks about enabling multiple color players with bit 4 of 53275.

All you have to state now is that the Atari palette is subjective and all you would have done in this thread is express your biased stubbornness. I am surprised you know nothing about bitplanes and after all the evidence still stick to your biased opinion. Getting back to the point you were suppose to reply to: I don't accept any conspiracy theory that Atari purposely made the C64 of Pacman inferior. You're letting your imagination run away from you.

 

>>For TV-based machines, half-pixel movement in color modes like 160*200 isn't that useful as luminance modes where it's doable on Atari.

 

>It's the reason that Last V8 or Red Max are less "wobbly" on the C64 when accellerating horizontally for a start...

 

Re-read the line: "isn't THAT useful". Colors are not retained at 320 resolution due to NTSC crystal but luminances seems to work okay and that half-pixel doesn't constitute all the scrolling hardware.

 

>>However, you do have a choice to mix the 320*200 mode with 160*200 mode at any scanline with one cycle DMA of DL.

 

>And the C64 can have both modes on the same scanline with no extra DMA overhead at all.

 

You missed the point-- the point was DMA DL is better than having to modify registers.

 

>>Okay, so you were being vague about the resolution of your overlay.

 

>No, you jumped in with both feet and incorrectly declared something impossible without actually knowing what it would be. My overlay could have been 160x100, 80x200 or 80x100 but the techniques discussed are still perfectly sound and will work regardless despite your claim, the lower vertical resolutions merely require less raster splits and sprite definitions.

 

No, now you are stating the resolutions so you WERE being vague. I was replying to Frohn's msg in msg #3013 and you jumped in and decide to give your own example which you still have to prove can be done using only 2 screen rams. I understand your mode of argumentation-- keep everything vague until the other side commits and then change the definition to suit your needs. To increase bit depth in 80*200 is meaningless for Atari since we already have 80*200*16 mode.

more later...

[potatohead]

Bring it C= guys!

 

I remain unconvinced.

 

Game on, I'm still enjoying the thread and learning things. Appreciated.

 

[TMR]

And I disproved you with examples of bitplanes and this link: http://www.atariarchives.org/c1bag/page192.php which talks about enabling multiple color players with bit 4 of 53275.

 

You didn't disprove it; the page you've just linked to quite clearly proves my point where it says "Remember that bit titled "Multiple Color Player Enable"? If you turn on that bit [...] then pairs of players that overlap will generate yet another color" (my emphasis). i'll say it again, you were comparing an object generated by two players (as defined by your own source as well as other references and the way the registers in the machine itself work) on the A8 to an object produced with just one hardware sprite on the C64 and that's an unfair comparison.

 

Getting back to the point you were suppose to reply to: I don't accept any conspiracy theory that Atari purposely made the C64 of Pacman inferior. You're letting your imagination run away from you.

 

The wording and smiley should have made it obvious that i was joking... sorry, didn't know i wasn't allowed to take this less than totally seriously.

 

Re-read the line: "isn't THAT useful". Colors are not retained at 320 resolution due to NTSC crystal but luminances seems to work okay and that half-pixel doesn't constitute all the scrolling hardware.

 

Again, we're not talking about all of it and just the smoothness, please stop trying to change the subject. And on the C64 the colours are retained so it's hugely useful and would be on the A8 if the same were true.

 

I was replying to Frohn's msg in msg #3013 and you jumped in and decide to give your own example which you still have to prove can be done using only 2 screen rams.

 

Okay, if i have to prove what seems like a hideously simple bit of theory i'll try to have it done this weekend at some point but just so that we don't get any more baseless accusations of me being vague i'll state in advance what i'll be doing; i'm going to generate a layer of single colour, horizontally expanded sprites (seven across, ten down) over a bitmapped screen with the data pointers will be changed between rows of sprites without the glitches you erroneously predicted and i will use at most two sets of data pointers. The sprites will be whatever stuff i have lying around rather than an actual enhancement layer because this is merely a proof of concept, but it'd just be a matter of putting new sprite definitions in.

[TMR]

Bring it C= guys!

 

I remain unconvinced.

 

Hang on... unconvinced of what exactly?

 

Game on, I'm still enjoying the thread and learning things. Appreciated.

 

 

Honestly, that's why i love these threads personally; i've learnt a huge amount over the years about the A8, Spectrum, Commodore 264 series, BBC Micro, Amstrad CPC and my own platform through these sorts of discussion.

[atariksi]

And I disproved you with examples of bitplanes and this link: http://www.atariarchives.org/c1bag/page192.php which talks about enabling multiple color players with bit 4 of 53275.

 

You didn't disprove it; the page you've just linked to quite clearly proves my point where it says "Remember that bit titled "Multiple Color Player Enable"? If you turn on that bit [...] then pairs of players that overlap will generate yet another color" (my emphasis). i'll say it again, you were comparing an object generated by two players (as defined by your own source as well as other references and the way the registers in the machine itself work) on the A8 to an object produced with just one hardware sprite on the C64 and that's an unfair comparison.

 

...

If you go back and read last year's reply to the very same point you made, you will see that I stated that when I use the multicolor sprite mode, I only claim atari as having 2 multicolor sprites not 4. As far as bit 5 (should be bit 5) of 53275 enabling multicolor player mode, that's exactly what it does and that's exactly how bitplanes work-- combinations of bitplanes produce more than two colors rather than just two. You basically want to me admit that bit 5 of 53275 is meaningless. What were you waiting for since last year if you still didn't accept it.

 

>The wording and smiley should have made it obvious that i was joking... sorry, didn't know i wasn't allowed to take this less than totally seriously.

 

Some smilies are true and jokes at the same time.

 

>>Colors are not retained at 320 resolution due to NTSC crystal but luminances seems to work okay and that half-pixel doesn't constitute all the scrolling hardware.

 

>Again, we're not talking about all of it and just the smoothness, please stop trying to change the subject. And on the C64 the colours are retained so it's hugely useful and would be on the A8 if the same were true.

 

They aren't. I tried it on a C64 before I made this claim before (elsewhere). On an Amiga using RGB connection, I see it's retained.

 

>>I was replying to Frohn's msg in msg #3013 and you jumped in and decide to give your own example which you still have to prove can be done using only 2 screen rams.

 

>Okay, if i have to prove what seems like a hideously simple bit of theory i'll try to have it done this weekend at ...

 

First of all, I suggest you read msg #3013 where we are talking about doing a full screen height sprites like Atari has built in to do an overlay. I SPECEFICALLY mentioned the word overscan which rules out any of the resolutions you assumed to be-- 160*100, 80*200, etc. No need to redefine things now after the argument has shown you to have misunderstood. Don't declare someone to be erroneous if you yourself haven't even understood what is to be done.

[atariksi]

Bring it C= guys!

 

I remain unconvinced.

 

Hang on... unconvinced of what exactly?

 

Game on, I'm still enjoying the thread and learning things. Appreciated.

 

 

Honestly, that's why i love these threads personally; i've learnt a huge amount over the years about the A8, Spectrum, Commodore 264 series, BBC Micro, Amstrad CPC and my own platform through these sorts of discussion.

 

You only love them if you can get away if you can get away with your biased views that you express. Once you are shown to be wrong, then you have to resort to straw-man arguments and Chewbacca defense or resort to redefining things.

[potatohead]

I asked the C= guys to bring it to the table, BECAUSE I remain unconvinced that it's the better machine overall.

 

The niches have been identified, and there are some where the C64 rules. There are more of these for the Atari, at this point in the discussion, thus making it the better of the two machines.

 

Game on!

[TMR]

If you go back and read last year's reply to the very same point you made, you will see that I stated that when I use the multicolor sprite mode, I only claim atari as having 2 multicolor sprites not 4.

 

Multicolour sprite mode allows two sprites to work in tandem, it does not magically make them into one multicolour sprite. Again, the link you pointed to, all the other references i've read over on Atari Archives, other A8 programmers i've talked to and the hardware registers themselves say that isn't the case, your personal terminology is at odds with everyone else's.

 

As far as bit 5 (should be bit 5) of 53275 enabling multicolor player mode, that's exactly what it does and that's exactly how bitplanes work-- combinations of bitplanes produce more than two colors rather than just two.

 

Combinations of bitplanes, plural, in the same way that you're using a combination of sprites, plural, and then comparing them to a C64 sprite, singular.

 

They aren't. I tried it on a C64 before I made this claim before (elsewhere). On an Amiga using RGB connection, I see it's retained.

 

There are thousands of C64 games using that resolution to move sprites or for horizontal scrolling and others still that roll the definitions of high resolution characters back against that scroll for parallax effects - if it wasn't retained on the C64, those games wouldn't work. i'd try to be charitable and say "perhaps it's an NTSC thing i'm not aware of" but i know that isn't the case because nobody has ever mentioned how games like Io, Slayer, Phobia and so forth have colour issues on their NTSC machines. Heaven has already told you that the C64 original of Venus Express scrolls with that resolution, why are you ignoring the A8 coder as well?

 

No need to redefine things now after the argument has shown you to have misunderstood. Don't declare someone to be erroneous if you yourself haven't even understood what is to be done.

 

i was going to do what Frohn said was possible and he didn't mention overscan. Okay, if you want a cheap and rather sad little victory, the C64 can't do what you said after you introduced overscan because it uses the same sprites to generate the overscan... and you go on about me redefining things, adding overscan like that was a hideously cheap way to change what Frohn was claiming.

[TMR]

I asked the C= guys to bring it to the table, BECAUSE I remain unconvinced that it's the better machine overall.

 

i doubt any of us will convince you... i'd be surprised if anyone was trying to at this stage of the game and i'm starting to wonder why i'm bothering when people are posting links to sites that directly contradict what they're saying but carry on saying it regardless.

Edited April 2, 2009 by TMR

[oky2000]

lol what a load, and it took a team of you make a list... the skramble game he listed... I just played it on the c 128 in c64 mode... it was crap game play. switching to 128 it was even crappier why I don't know is there an issue with it? So I was forced to dig out the c64 itself. I can't believe I dug the machines out of the garage for this tripe. I want the 2 1/2 hours of my life back now.... My test is this I had an 800 and an 800xl.... Jeff my neighbor had a vic20 and a c64 his neighbor had a 1200Xl.... guess where the whole gang all ways ended up to play? You guessed it 8 to ten kids always on the Atari system and 1 or 2 on the c64 and soon none on the 64 and all on the Atari.

Jeff always had the latest c64 stuff and way more money and lavished it on his systems. We simply got the modest things we could afford or sometimes type in. It sums it all up right there. Dollar for dollar game for game, playability and fun was always on the Atari's side. In fact that being said I am reminded of why I put this thing out in the garage in the first place..... one c64 and one c128 going to the thrift store. My wife thanks you for helping me to finally clear this mess out of the third bay.

 

I went trolling commodore sites to find this crappy software and I found many c64 fans use this exact quote... and I couldn't say it better...

Crummy scrolling (that makes the ZX Spectrum look good), and, in short, a tedious waste of time.

straight from the commodore fanbase

 

 

Even many of those atari games developed during 1980s using 25%-50% capability are better than C64 games at around same time.

 

That's a subjective matter of opinion - personally, the games are one of the reasons i got a C64 after a year of owning my 800XL to be honest, there was almost nothing i found to be anywhere near as playable as the games i was seeing on a friend's machine, i think Mercenary and Elektraglide were the two exceptions and the majority of titles either existed on both (usually with a better soundtrack, One Man And His Droid, The Last V8 or Thrust as a couple of random examples) or were only on the C64.

 

Another factor was not being able to find a bloody assembler i could A) afford and B) use on a tape-based machine! =-)

 

Most C64 sided people just keep stressing/repeating the same feature of having 8+ sprites on a scanline (X-axis) using 32 colors from a palette of 16 colors.

 

There's a reason for that, the majority of games are 2D so it's a huge plus for the C64 for those titles.

 

I am giving a reasonable answer based on the games I had as compared to the same games on C64 (without getting into hardware technicalities): Super Break Out, Frogger, Pac-man, Donkey Kong, Centipede, Defender and some others. Didn't have a big collection initially since even Defender cost me $50 from Sears.

 

Well, you can stress the same feature but it does not prove a machine superior unless you systematically go through each feature and show software that takes advantage of that feature better than the other machine. And it's not 2D-- it's X-axis. Y-axis is also part of 2D and Atari excels when you start to optimize in that dimension.

 

So your whole argument for which machine is better is based on technically simple games written on limited cartridge memory? LOL well I have a suprise, we went way beyond that level of simplicity on the C64 about a quarter of a century ago

 

Well even if we talk about commercial games the Atari A8 wouldn't have a hope in hell of doing the following arcade conversion anywhere near as good as the C64 really for

was programmed in a couple of months by a few people at Ocean, and it's a bit delusional if you think that is because of lack of effort it can't be done on the A8, the C64 was a better compromise, no the only compromise the C64 made was a fixed 4bit palette look up table that's it, Sprites, scrolling, SID, CPU instruction set is all better on the C64 FACT. PM graphics are just a little better than VCS, and the Pokey has kinda nice style to it but it neither has the frequency range, sophisticated operators or special effects built into the SID. Pokey tunes all kinda sound the same, listen to Panther on the A8 and then on the C64, it is my 'atari fanboy test' track

 

The ONLY thing the A8 is better at is total available color palette, shame you can't even get the same 16 colours on screen AT THE SAME TIME as the C64 palette in 160x200 OR with the same amount of multiplexed 24x21 pixeled sprites per 24 scanlines without using ANY extra CPU/Graphics chip cycles. 16 shades of the same colour are a bit useless for most games. The C64 is officially 8 sprites per scanline, it is in the 1983 Programmer's Reference Guide which actually tells you this, it is not TOTAL of 8 just like A8 is not just a total of 4 Missile and 1 Player graphic also by the way.

 

There are some games on the A8 I love don't get me wrong but to say it is a better machine than the C64 based on things that don't even come close to fully utilising the C64 is a bit silly really like Pac Man or Moon Patrol etc and even then Zaxxon and Super Zaxxon cartridge (the inferior version on C64 the tape versios were even better) still look heaps better than the 4 colour mess on A8, but if that's the only way people can justify a stupid argument then be my guest. Also Atarisoft did really shit conversions for the C64 anyway (on puprose derrr) which is why Oceans Donkey Kong C64 is so much better than Atari's effort on C64 (which is still better than the stretched blocky graphics of A8, ditto C64 Defender and PacMan are just ok but there are clones which are better and arcade perfect anyway for most games) Galaxian is an example of an A8 early 80s game that is really better on A8 but then we have an absolutely awesome conversion of Skramble and Time Pilot instead. But like I said these are caveman programs written by amateurs anyway s why bother.

 

I was hoping to see more game like Space Harrier A8 myself than seeing silly posts comparing ancient simplistic games, oh well never mind I'll leave this post alone then and know not to bother next time

 

If anybody thinks the C64 is only good for mildly breathed over VCS games like Donkey Kong then you're a bit of an idiot if those are the only type of games that are compared too whilst conveniently ignoring all the incredibly advanced games that the A8 could never do due to lack of VIC-II/SID features!

 

Turbocharge, Enforcer, Buggy Boy, Last Ninja, Ghosts & Goblins, Mayhem in Monsterland...these games are NOT possible on an A8 until anyone bothers to show me some linked videos to BETTER games technically I am sticking to that.

 

Never mind those games the A8 doesn't even have a version of Skramble as good as

or anything like it written in 1983 I shall assume from the lack of EVIDENCE to the contrary that the A8 is actually inferior in every way to the C64 except a useless 256 colour pallette....yeah great 4 out of 256 colors in 160x200 is soooo much better than 4/16 colors per 8x8 pixel block ANYWHERE on the screen isn't guys LOL

 

The facts are

 

Pokey is INFERIOR to SID 1 extra channel with waveforms that all sound the same the C64 is 3 with 5 waveform types/3 special effects plus filters PLUS sample channel)

PM is INFERIOR to Sprites (You can cover the entire screen with Sprites with very little effort, some coders uses sprites for parallax scrolling)

both have H/W scrolling but Uridium is FASTER AND SMOOTHER than any A8 scrolling game I have seen EVER.

DL vs Raster, it's the same thing, the C64 has scanline accurate timers so it is identical

CPU is faster on A8 but 6510 has better instruction set/ optimised version of 6502 A8 uses.

Max resolution is the same on both for games (320x200x2 colours or 160x200x4 colour) EXCEPT we have 4 colours per 4x8 pixel block too and you have 16 luminance on XL/XE only in 160x200....I know which one ALL games coders use.

Colour Palette easy win for A8..shame it makes no difference for anything except copper type vertical shading effects under the crappy PM graphics. Wow I can choose my 4 colours from 256 @ 160x200...I'm sure they will be radically different to the perfectly chosen range of 16 colours available on VIC-II huh?

 

ONLY Palette is larger on A8, but like I said who cares when @ 160x200 you can only have four colours anyway big deal

 

PS C64 had an arcade perfect version of Defender on tape (which loaded in about 2-3 minutes) for £6 so who cares how crap Atari programmed the C64 version for £30, no wonder they went bust and C= made billions under Jack Tramiel!

 

I keep hearing all this 'theoretical' rubbish and yet no one can post a single game that looks faster and better with better sound than the four main ones I mentioned (Turbocharge, Enforcer, Buggy Boy, Last Ninja, Ghosts & Goblins, Mayhem in Monsterland) I smell a lot of Atari BULLCRAP in this thread

http://www.archive.org/details/C64Gamevide...hive18-Skramble

omfg I can't waste anymore time on this.... even with the fastload cart starting was a what I remembered got sandwich got drink. and the stupid load procedures.....

 

Erm you should be looking at the MORE THAN 4 COLOUR 160x200 graphics and the sound. The game was 1983 and was char scroll routine in software not hardware. show me a A8 Skramble game with 16 different COLOURS NOT HUES @ 160x200 in 1983 and then come back to me Even the VIC20 16k version by the same company has very good graphics (and why it is a char softscroll as it was a quick port in the C64s launch year so shovelware)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Faster scrolling?

 

Come on... you can move data around as much as you want but are limited to 50 or 60 FPS. The Atari can scroll much faster anyway since you can point the screen anywhere you want, on a per mode line basis.

 

Better instruction set? Bullshit. The 6510 is functionally identical to the 6502 and anyone beyond novice programming level should know that.

The "on-chip I/O port" is merely a poor-man's PIA type extension to the 6502 and the only advantage it gives is the ability to switch the normal memory-mapped I/O block out and replace it with ROM or RAM.

 

Which is why A8 tapes take 1 hour to load 64k and the C64 takes 5-6 minutes with it's turbo loaders overwriting the tape loader shadowed in RAM from ROM and overwritten/replaced by the programmer. Fairly important to have SOFTWARE turbo tape and disk loaders I think Turbo loader carts only worked with Pirated disk games, you need to replace the CIA chip with a new turbo rom at least for some success in the early days.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not even to mention Archon.

 

Most C64 guys even today haven't recoznized the rule of light balancing in the game, because the C64 has not enough colours to show it all correctly.

 

I just can't understand the argument that until you show that game is do-able on A8, C64 is better. There are some Apple II games/applications that don't exist for Atari nor C64, but that doesn't mean they are not do-able.

 

C64 was made with cheaper parts to outsell the Atari not to beat it technically.

 

That's wrong, typical response but still ok.... Whilst Commodore had you all paying through the nose for MOS Technologies items as customers like the 6502C etc etc Commodore got all their stuff at cost price and FREE design work. I will say it again, Bob Yannes designed the SID chip @ standard employee rates for Commodore, ie NOTHING PEANUTS etc, MOS made it for Commodore for the same cost as TI spent making their own calculator chips and tried to screw Commodore in 1975/6 etc because Commodore couldn't make their own so they had to buy them for more. Truth is the VIC-II and SID would cost ANY OTHER COMPANY a fortune to be commissioned by a chip designer..Commodore got it for 2x 6 months paycheck

 

It is called vertical integration. The real cost of making and designing a C64 FOR EVERYONE ELSE would similar to the cost of producing an Atari 800 but Commodore OWNED MOS Technologies so it cost them $165 to make and sell for $399 not $799

 

Also if the SID is so rubbish why do different tunes from different musicians sound different (ie Martin Galway/Rob Hubbard/Matt Grey etc) but ALL Pokey music has the SAME SOUND INSTRUMENT/BASELINE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

lol what a load, and it took a team of you make a list... the skramble game he listed... I just played it on the c 128 in c64 mode... it was crap game play. switching to 128 it was even crappier why I don't know is there an issue with it?

Why don't you play some of the good games instead? He gave you a few examples:

 

"Turbocharge, Enforcer, Buggy Boy, Last Ninja, Ghosts & Goblins, Mayhem in Monsterland...these games are NOT possible on an A8 until anyone bothers to show me some linked videos to BETTER games technically I am sticking to that."

 

 

You guys make me crazy....

OFCOURSE the A8 can do those games. Possibly not at 50Hz. But who cares?

The whole C64 community doesn't care about 3D is slow as hell, or the movement is ridiculously blocky on the C64.

 

According to your facts about "the A8 cannot do this or that", the C64 cannot do :

 

-Space Harrier

-Rescue on Fractalus

-Koronis Rift

-The Eidolon

-Stunt Car Racer

-Amaurote

-Test Drive

-Turbo Charge

-Power Drift

 

and so on....

 

Oh yes because Pit Stop is so much better graphically than Turbo Charge isn't it, oh yes forgive me LOL

 

Your Space Harrier has taken 3 years, does not run on an 800XL or XE and still isn't finished, ours took 2 weeks to write by one man as only his second game ever written commercially for a software company and all done 2 decades ago by himself with no extra features documented. Rof/KR/Eidolon all use a lower screen resolution than the C64, so it is faster but more blocky just like Mercenary, little faster lower resolution on 800XL/XE

 

I don't see many games like Turbo outrun, Turbcharge OR Power Drift anywhere near as fast as the C64 on A8..show me a racing game as good....Death Race? LOL please...oh and how is your Outrun coming? How about Taladega? Another shitty 1985 game light years behind C64 Turbo Outrun or Power Drift in speed but we MUST BELIEVE THEORETICALLY possible on A8 and better with NO EVIDENCE? LOL please stop making me laugh.

 

Buggy Boy on C64 has no comparison on A8, it simply is not possible as you do not have the same VIC-II screen mode addressing sorry FACT.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I did exactly what the guy told me to do.... he even posted a link to on youtube. I still don't see anything I feel is 'not possible' it all comes down to fun and playability. Seems like on the c64 it can look good but plays eh so so, or if it manages to play great it looks not so good. I guess I am just use to the gameplay offered by the xl, 130XE, amiga, falcon and any of the modern systems I now use. The commodore seems hesitant to me... sluggish..

Sluggish? You are simply trying the wrong games.

 

IO

 

And yes, the A8 couldn't do that.

 

 

Finally something that responds more like what I am use to! Graphics are very Atari like too! A decent side scroller, I give it about an 81%. but the music in the game is different in the video you posted. It is not SID, and the smoothing in the video must be due to youtube codec, much like the other 8 bit posts we see.

I shouldn't have to work that hard or need an expert to direct me to a good responsive game, it kinda sums up the experience. I don't think I am keeping the c64 for a couple of games. But I will say this I find some of GEOS pretty interesting. I think if anyone wants to play along and truly compare they need to do what I am doing a real Atari 800XL/XE vs a Real c64. Looks like lemon64 has most of what we need to get the software. And then run em, then the truth of the audio and video as well as gameplay can be seen. And the lemon votes kinda back up my number it looks like they rated it an 80 percent as well. The lemon64 review also notes slow response of ship. I personally like the fact it is a little more challenging than the other 64 games right at the start. Having to start over to know where the bad guys are coming from because the ship can't cross the screen fast enough otherwise is a little daunting.

 

LoL I am still waiting to see ONE GAME with the same 16 DIFFERENT colours @ 160x200 and same quality sound as that ONE C64 game called IO...or shall we talk about A8 Defender being better If you can't see the quality of those graphics done by Bob being better than anything else around in the 80s for the Atari and even now you need to get some glasses from your OWN DOCTOR

[oky2000]

Even many of those atari games developed during 1980s using 25%-50% capability are better than C64 games at around same time.

 

That's a subjective matter of opinion - personally, the games are one of the reasons i got a C64 after a year of owning my 800XL to be honest, there was almost nothing i found to be anywhere near as playable as the games i was seeing on a friend's machine, i think Mercenary and Elektraglide were the two exceptions and the majority of titles either existed on both (usually with a better soundtrack, One Man And His Droid, The Last V8 or Thrust as a couple of random examples) or were only on the C64.

 

Another factor was not being able to find a bloody assembler i could A) afford and B) use on a tape-based machine! =-)

 

Most C64 sided people just keep stressing/repeating the same feature of having 8+ sprites on a scanline (X-axis) using 32 colors from a palette of 16 colors.

 

There's a reason for that, the majority of games are 2D so it's a huge plus for the C64 for those titles.

 

I am giving a reasonable answer based on the games I had as compared to the same games on C64 (without getting into hardware technicalities): Super Break Out, Frogger, Pac-man, Donkey Kong, Centipede, Defender and some others. Didn't have a big collection initially since even Defender cost me $50 from Sears.

 

Well, you can stress the same feature but it does not prove a machine superior unless you systematically go through each feature and show software that takes advantage of that feature better than the other machine. And it's not 2D-- it's X-axis. Y-axis is also part of 2D and Atari excels when you start to optimize in that dimension.

 

So your whole argument for which machine is better is based on technically simple games written on limited cartridge memory? LOL well I have a suprise, we went way beyond that level of simplicity on the C64 about a quarter of a century ago

 

...

 

No, I gave one answer where I stated my observations since YOU complained that you don't want to hear "technical" stuff and then you decided to be a hypocrite and start claiming technical things although not correct.

You are reading out of context. The argument was answer to games that were better even in the early years (w/o GTIA).

 

>Well even if we talk about commercial games the Atari A8 wouldn't have a hope in hell of doing the following arcade ...

 

I don't go by my limited experience. Oh, here's a game that's superior on C64-- so C64 is better. Oops, someone recently created/found a better version on Atari. Atari is better. No, they just upgraded the C64 version so C64 is better. Etc. Etc. I rather stick to a more rational approach than yours.

 

>...CPU instruction set is all better on the C64 FACT. PM graphics are just a little better than VCS, and the Pokey has kinda nice style to it but it neither has the frequency range, sophisticated operators or special effects built into the SID. Pokey tunes all kinda sound the same, listen to Panther on the A8 and then on the C64, it is my 'atari fanboy test' track

 

Again going by some limited sample to generalize over entire POKEY. You NEVER read this thread because you are raising the same points without refuting the replies that were made to your points in this thread. CPU instructions work along with ANTIC DL instructions at 1.79Mhz whereas your instruction set is just 6502. As I stated, POKEY can play 68Khz sampled audio on 4 DACs.

 

>The ONLY thing the A8 is better at is total available color palette, shame you can't even get the same 16 colours on screen AT THE SAME TIME as the C64 palette in 160x200 OR with the same amount of multiplexed 24x21 pixeled sprites ...

 

You are BIASED. I am more interested in the truth than your bias toward a machine. "ONLY" colors! I just stated a bunch of things that are superior on A8. You can get all 256 colors on-screen. You can get GPRIOR effects in 160*200 and also do sprite overlays. You are biased in comparing standard mode with a sprite-enhanced mode on the C64.

 

>16 shades of the same colour are a bit useless for most games. The C64 is officially 8 sprites per scanline, it is in the 1983 Programmer's Reference Guide which actually tells you this, it is not TOTAL of 8 just like A8 is not just a total of 4 Missile and 1 Player graphic also by the way.

 

You have a lot to learn if you are going to argue hardware. You have no idea how GTIA modes work. There are three of them and sprites work with them. You can also use GPRIOR in Graphics 10 which is paletted mode-- regardless of what you do to your C64, you won't get this mode. And 16 shades of one color are useful for photographs. Stop calling people names if you haven't even read the thread nor understood the argument. First go back and answer all the remarks in this thread regarding C64 inferiority before you call people names. Once you call people names instead of answering the point, you lose and are no longer interested in the truth...

 

I am so sorry you bought an inferior machine thinking it was superior to A8 but people make mistakes in life and you have to live with it. But you are making things worse for yourself by arguing against reality.

 

Talking about games like Defender or Pac-Man and their rubbish Atarisoft C64 versions (when the VIC-20 versions were suspiciously the best available but the 64 versions were piles of shit it was either on purpose OR they can't program for shit so went bust anyway...oh wait...they did go bust LOL)

 

Inferior in what way....your VCS sounding rubbish Pokey chip? Show me a Pokey playing electric guitar sounds without samples then? No? didn't think so

 

PM's better than Sprites? Oh ok show me a game with a screen full of 100s of PM graphics in 4 colours? No? Oh wait no because PM is shit compared to sprites

 

Graphics? Erm I already said 256 colours is nice but show me one fast action game with ALL 16 colours animated on screen at once like Alleykat or Uridium? No? Oh yes I forgot because you can't do it except for Copper list type raster effects in the background as there is no Char mode screen like the C64s

 

 

SHOW ME SOME EXAMPLES!!

 

Here are 3 more examples of MODERN GAMES BETTER ON THE C64

 

Gauntlet

Druid

Arkanoid (the sound will never be done on any other 8bit computer in the world like that C64 version FACT)

 

Now show me some videos to back up this claim the machine is superior or just go and cry into your technical manuals because there is no video.

 

Show me ONE GAME AS GOOD AS URIDIUM? hmmm where is your hardware super smooth scrolling...I can't see anything faster and smoother or more responsive than Uridium...such a simple game idea but you just can't show me one scrolling game of variable speed like that 1986 classic Uridium oh dear

 

 

But my whole point was that the first game video I posted for Enforcer 2 IS PROOF of what a C64 is graphically capable of and PROOF of the versatility of the SID chip was with a simple non sample using little riff that sounds 99% like an electric guitar using the SID. Of course the SID can do many different sounds without samples which is why the music sounds so diverse and different but that was a simple example of the power of the built in waveforms alone. The point is those two games I showed were giving proof of the machine in action and not theory. If I said 'in theory it is quite possible to get an electric guitar instrument on SID with no sample playback or CPU overhead' nobody would believe me hence I wanted examples in response to my own which I would have been happy to hear with an open mind but this is not happening never mind ho hum.

 

The facts are

 

In your opinion.

 

Pokey is INFERIOR to SID 1 extra channel with waveforms that all sound the same the C64 is 3 with 5 waveform types/3 special effects plus filters PLUS sample channel)

 

If SID is so much better than POKEY, why is it that a simple game like pacman

can't it get the sounds dead on? POKEY did. Defender? You have got to be joking.

the POKEY sounds are arcade perfect and far from close on the C64.

 

Defender is dead on with the Atari, especially the sound and the graphics. The C64

is laughable sound wise....not a good example of SID at all.

 

SID is NOT as flexible as the POKEY, just a lot easier to get it to do CERTAIN things.

Music is one only becasue it would take a lot of work on the coders of an A8 to add

all the ADSR and other SID features. We still have that option.

 

With the right software control, POKEY will outflex SID anyday.

 

 

PM is INFERIOR to Sprites (You can cover the entire screen with Sprites with very little effort, some coders uses sprites for parallax scrolling)

both have H/W

 

Really? show me an example of this. I bet I acn cover a screen bettter with the player than you could

ever hope to with 8 24x16 pixel sprites. 256 color choises verse 16 with the sprites.

 

scrolling but Uridium is FASTER AND SMOOTHER than any A8 scrolling game I have seen EVER.

 

 

This is the kool-Aid talking and tells me you have not seen much on the A8.

One game dont cut it even if this were the case.

 

DL vs Raster, it's the same thing, the C64 has scanline accurate timers so it is identical

 

 

This is beyond laughable. Scanline accurate timers the same thing as display lists? It's now clear you are talking out of your

ass and not from factual information. Show me all the graphic modes on one screen at once like an Atari 8 bit can with a

simple list.....Oh that's right....you can't. You have to write a complicated timer based interrupt scheme and still wont come

close.

 

 

CPU is faster on A8 but 6510 has better instruction set/ optimised version of 6502 A8 uses.

 

 

The 6510 varies from 6502 only in the implementation of 6 I/O ports at addresses 0000 and 0001.

Go do some research before you further make a fool of yourself.

 

Max resolution is the same on both for games (320x200x2 colours or 160x200x4 colour) EXCEPT we have 4 colours per 4x8 pixel block too and you have 16 luminance on XL/XE only in 160x200....I know which one ALL games coders use.

 

Clearly this shows me you dont know a thing about the power and flexibility of the display lists features of the A8.

 

Colour Palette easy win for A8..shame it makes no difference for anything except copper type vertical shading effects under the crappy PM graphics. Wow I can choose my 4 colours from 256 @ 160x200...I'm sure they will be radically different to the perfectly chosen range of 16 colours available on VIC-II huh?

 

I can have any of 256 colors for those 4 colors and not just a paltry choice of 16 colors.

I can also have with the display list many more than four colors on screen and also with simple

interrupt tricks. The C64 cant because it at max has only 16 colors....this was just plain ridiculous

and quite uninformed C64 fan boy on your part. Perfectly chosen range? I want to see violet and

purple and jade sahdes....oh that's right they are not perfect choices so C64 cant use them.

 

Sprites

 

The hardware in the 64 is 8 registers worth of sprites. To show more than 8 sprites on screen

you HAVE to reuse the sprites by quickly moving them. There will never be more than 8 sprites

on screen physically with the C=64. Its an illusion just like with the player missiles of the A8.

 

The difference is the players can have the full height of the screen for images.

 

There are advantages for either hardware here. I like the multi color mode of the C64.

 

4 colour out of 256 when we already have 4 shades or red green blue gray cyan orange blah blah so yeh it doesn't matter if you can only have 4...we can have ALL 16 on screen in 4x8 blocks with ZERO CPU overhead due to the hardware setup

 

If your Pokey is so good why do all the tunes have the same rubbish instruments that sound like Atari VCS stuff? Like I said listen to Panther soundtrack on C64 (sounds unique) and then to the Pokey version for the A8 game of Panther (sounds rubbish and the same baseline as VCS type instrument in all pokey music I hear)

 

Pac-Man tune is perfectly reproduced on other games thanks, why can't the Pokey make the Donkey Kong sound effects perfectly like our Nintendo Licensed Version in the UK NOT programmed by those lame idiots at Atarisoft in 1985? hmmm oh wait it doesn't matter now I bet right? I also pointed out Guardian by Alligata software is a spot on conversion of Defender, it is identical to Defender in sound and graphics NOT the shitty Atarisoft program (which again suspiciously along with PacMan and Galaxians was excellent on Vic20 but rubbish on C64...I wonder why? LOL)

 

As for sprites it is a single value poked into a single register once ever 22nd scanline. If you want to use 1 sprite as a 24x200 pixel unit that is simple, and uses no CPU time at all really, it takes just 5 Pokes to one register per 50 or 60 screen refreshes to have EIGHT 24x200 column sprites in 2 or four colours before H or V expansion tricks We just CHOOSE to multiplex them to have 64 hardware sprites seperate on the screen...which is a little bit more usefull I think No one with multiple brain cells would prefer the PM graphics rubbish over the C64 sprites come on.

 

As for the screen modes then how comes Mayhem in Monsterland has no equal on the A8 for total number of colours on screen? I can't find a single game with the same high quality animation/scrolling/colour graphics as that.

 

I want examples of moderm A8 games that are really pushing the machine..like I said Space Harrier is a good example keep that coming. Stop quoting me shit early 80s games that could probably be reprogrammed for the VIC20 or an MSX or something

 

 

(can't be bothered to read anymore in here, nobody is posting a single game that looks better than Mayhem in Monsterland, Buggy Boy/Turbocharge,Enforcer 2. So that is platform game, shootemup and driving covered)

 

PS If someone had mentioned Encounter on the A8 I would have been impressed, that was actually better than the C64 version and a good fast game as well. The games DO exist but you are all too busy trying to not have an intelligent discussion and getting upset that you miss the gems like Encounter My intention is not to troll but if others want to write unfounded rubbish then carry on. I have posted many examples of modern games that use many features of the C64 be it sprites/char mode gfx for 16 colours/samples or SID waveforms/effects.

 

All I am seeing is upset fanboys writing a load of crap now. If I was a fan boy I wouldn't play the following games exclusively on A8 than any other 8bit machine..

 

RoF (KR and Eidolon are too similar in speed but RoF is better if a slightly lower res so I prefer the speed of it)

Star Raiders

Galaxian (the only 80s arcade game not done better by anyone on the C64...see you just need to think and find the games)

Encounter

 

I just wanted to see more games of the quality of Space Harrier A8 because that truly looks like something pushing the machine properly...not bloody Atarisoft Pacman/Donkey Kong AGAIN when I post awesome 8bit coding skills present in Enforcer 2 (even if it was on another 8bit as true retrogamers you should be in awe of that game's achievements...only a fan boy will look at those 8bit graphics and try and rubbish them just because they are NOT on an A8. Jealousy is no good people...you just miss out on great games. I had an ST and Amiga, I was not stupid enough to miss out on ST Gauntlet 1 (Gauntlet 2 is shit on both and not on Amiga) just because I had an Amiga. You should look at each game on each machine and take it on its merits not steadfastly live in a blinkered A8 world with 1984 quality graphics/sound ok?

[oky2000]

For some odd reason, C64 people think it's better to just POKE a register and set a graphics mode rather than have a coprocessor let you set various graphics/text modes on a scanline basis and thus save CPU time and memory. They have less CPU time to begin with and they still prefer not having that option.

?

 

LDA #$40

STA $D01B

 

$D01B SPBGPR Sprite Priority Register

 

so... what now?

 

What now? Well the fact that you need to multiplex four missile graphics to make ONE sprite so thats

 

5 register writes to 4 just for ONE C64 hardware sprite type graphic using missiles for EVERY SINGLE ONE.

 

Sorry that one just got me started

[atariksi]

I asked the C= guys to bring it to the table, BECAUSE I remain unconvinced that it's the better machine overall.

 

i doubt any of us will convince you... i'd be surprised if anyone was trying to at this stage of the game and i'm starting to wonder why i'm bothering when people are posting links to sites that directly contradict what they're saying but carry on saying it regardless.

 

If you make a rational comment rather than keep repeating the samething without understanding people may accept.

 

Read from the link I gave:

 

Bit 4: Fifth Player Enable

Bit 5: Multiple Color Player Enable

 

If you set bit 5 = 0, you have two *monochrome* sprites. If you set bit 5 = 1, you have ONE multicolor sprite. Got it. That's definition of multicolor sprite on Atari. If you overlap two monochrome sprites, you still have two colors not 3. If you overlap to monochrome bitplanes on Amiga, you have two colors. If you set BPLCON0 to "2" instead of "1" (bits 12..14), then you have a multicolored bitplane. You are NOT understanding how bitplanes work nor the link I gave. You have lack of experience or want to deny any meaning to bit 5 working same was as BPLCON0.

[oky2000]

play any good side scroller on an actual arcade machine, on the Atari xl/xe, Amiga, or Falcon and the look as well as feel of the game on the c64 does not match up. The high frame rate would best be traded a little to service and handle the ship I am controlling, It simply does not make the trip across the screen as quickly and as smoothly as it needs to. I suspect that is why they tried to limit the play field as much as they did. Again click the links to lemon64 and you shall see what others have noticed as well and since it is being judged by people who like the machine, it must decidedly be so.

 

is the horse dead yet, do we have glue? shall we beat it some more?

 

 

 

I don't see your problem. No game on A8 will be smoother than 50 fps either. It's the video frequency and if you update every frame you are as good as you can get on both systems.

load "*",8 return

ready

run

press 'a'

insert disk

 

grrrrrrrr.......

 

open 4,4,25:print #4

load "*",8

run

hold down c= and run/stop for fast load one more time I am going to have to smack my head against the c64 keyboard real soon now!

 

edit *** did you here that thwak thwak thwak

---------the keyprints are now on my forehead!

 

To autoload a disk insert the disk first (derr) and then Type load"*",8 ONLY then move cursor to the "L" and press shift+runstop

 

Not exactly hard really......

 

 

 

As for arcade games well...that's funny because nobody bought the Falcon really, the ST has no smooth scrolling horizontal games, Uridium 2 on the Amiga is not even as fast and smooth as Uridium on the C64 and well there is no decent Uridium like game on a A8 at all..there was a Uridium rip-off...called Thunder-something...it was terrible, really horrible

 

Green Beret definitely sounds better on the C64 than A8, and looks slightly better and scrolls fine too hmmmm.

 

Ghosts and Goblins is more like the arcade version than the Spectrum/Amstrad/MSX/ST version. There were plenty of excellent conversions on the C64 like that and Bubble Bobble and Rainbow Islands and Buggy Boy for some different types of gameplay too etc. All slick fast smooth and lovely sounding games of ALL types. If programmers do a bad job don't blame the hardware

 

Even Salamander on C64 was better than the MSX version which had extra custom chips in the $40 cartridge it came on BUT the C64 game was only £12 disk and £9 tape hmmmm smoother and better sound and just as good graphics pretty much. Space Pilot is another fantastic 8 way scrolling Time Pilot clone too again for a few $ on tape. Sure SF2 is impossible to do nice on C64 compared to say Sega Master System but it is impossible on A8/Amstrad/Spectrum/MSX/ST/Amiga to do nicely either so who cares get a SNES for $99 maybe instead (cue death of home computers by Nintendo/Sega)

[atariksi]

If you go back and read last year's reply to the very same point you made, you will see that I stated that when I use the multicolor sprite mode, I only claim atari as having 2 multicolor sprites not 4.

 

Multicolour sprite mode allows two sprites to work in tandem, it does not magically make them into one multicolour sprite. Again, the link you pointed to, all the other references i've read over on Atari Archives, other A8 programmers i've talked to and the hardware registers themselves say that isn't the case, your personal terminology is at odds with everyone else's.

...

You are at odds with normal understanding of bitplanes. There's a difference between two sprites producing two colors vs. 3. They do work together but they can also work together as monochrome sprites and NOT be a multicolor sprites. See my previous post.

 

>Combinations of bitplanes, plural, in the same way that you're using a combination of sprites, plural, and then comparing them to a C64 sprite, singular.

 

No, I am comparing one multicolor Atari sprite to one multicolor C64 sprite. C64 used chunky mode whereas Atari uses bitplane mode. Simple if you broaden your mind a little.

 

>>They aren't. I tried it on a C64 before I made this claim before (elsewhere). On an Amiga using RGB connection, I see it's retained.

 

>There are thousands of C64 games using that resolution to move sprites or for horizontal scrolling and others still that roll the definitions of high resolution characters back against that scroll for parallax effects - if it wasn't retained on the C64, those games wouldn't work. i'd try to be charitable and say "perhaps it's an NTSC thing i'm not aware of" but i know that isn't the case because nobody has ever mentioned how games like Io, Slayer, Phobia and so forth have colour issues on their NTSC machines. Heaven has already told you that the C64 original of Venus Express scrolls with that resolution, why are you ignoring the A8 coder as well?

 

Don't make it sound like I stated "it doesn't work". I stated the color is not retained due to NTSC. 320 resolution scroll works great on Atari as far as luminance goes, but it doesn't retain the color either. Perhaps, you have been running in an emulator. I know one guy previously was posting C64 interlaced images captured with emulator because they look better than when viewed on real C64.

 

>>No need to redefine things now after the argument has shown you to have misunderstood. Don't declare someone to be erroneous if you yourself haven't even understood what is to be done.

 

>i was going to do what Frohn said was possible and he didn't mention overscan. Okay, if you want a cheap and rather sad little victory, the C64 can't do what you said after you introduced overscan because it uses the same sprites to generate the overscan... and you go on about me redefining things, adding overscan like that was a hideously cheap way to change what Frohn was claiming.

 

Hideous? I clearly stated overscan in msg #3013 and Frohn stated the same by claiming he can do sprites full height of screen like Atari does. I hope you know when you put up a full height sprite on Atari, it includes overscan (try this):

 

POKE 53248,128:POKE 53261,255:POKE 53256,255:POKE 704,96

[atariksi]

...

The hardware in the 64 is 8 registers worth of sprites. To show more than 8 sprites on screen

you HAVE to reuse the sprites by quickly moving them. There will never be more than 8 sprites

on screen physically with the C=64. Its an illusion just like with the player missiles of the A8.

You misunderstood how it works. If you multiplex C64 sprites, there really are more than 8 on a frame. A frame is not display "at once" but build up from rasterlines which are drawn from top to bottom. If you have a sprite at Y-position 50 and switch the Y-position to 150 at rasterline 100, the sprite will be displayed again on the very same frame.

 

The difference is the players can have the full height of the screen for images.

You can easily multiplex sprites to full height on C64. The C64 sprite logic is very multiplexing friendly. For example there are gfx modes which use a fullscreen sprite layer to enhance color depth.

 

Ahm, you forget that overscan eats up CPU cycles to limit your C64 multiplexer as well as bad scanlines as well as raster line interrupt overhead as well as all the cycles required to reuse sprite registers for vertical multiplexing. So if you are enhancing an image with sprite overlays, expect every 20 or so lines to see no enhancements (glitch depending on image). And if you just want to cover the screen with sprites (including overscan on vertical side) you can do it in BASIC w/o any interrupts or CPU cycles or RAM usage and have greater control than C64 on priority:

 

10 FOR T=53256 TO 53265:POKE T,255:NEXT T

20 POKE 53248,48:POKE 53249,80:POKE 53250,112:POKE 53251,144

30 POKE 53252,176:POKE 53253,184:POKE 53254,192:POKE 53255,200

40 POKE 704,32:POKE 705,64:POKE 706,128:POKE 707,16:POKE 623,32+1

 

Priority setting is:

 

POKE 623,32+1-- All Players on top of all playfields

POKE 623,32+2-- Players 0,1 on top of all playfields; players 2,3 below all playfields

POKE 623,32+0-- All Players at same depth as all playfields (ORs players with Playfields)

POKE 623,32+8-- Playfields 0,1 on top of all players; playfields 2,3 below all players

POKE 623,32+4-- All Playfields on top of all Players

 

Here it is msg #3013 in its original form, unedited and uninterrupted for those too lazy to look back. Now see how overscan is implied and explicitly stated.

[oky2000]

...

So if you are enhancing an image with sprite overlays, expect every 20 or so lines to see no enhancements (glitch depending on image).

More non-factual theorising stated as fact. How do you explain those c64 games that multiplex sprites together to create large enemies without any glitching? Reading through some of these posts, it's clear that the way some of you guys perceive the c64 is actually quite different to reality.

...

 

You have a mentality like Oswald taking things out of context to construct a straw-man argument. You can create large enemies because you only have to update the Y-position/shape ptrs during the raster interrupt, but in the case of image enhancement using a mulitcolored overlay-- you need to update x registers, y registers, and shape ptrs which won't fit in one scan line time.

 

Oswald is a superb demo coder...what have you done on the A8 yourself for the world to see?

 

 

If SID is so much better than POKEY, why is it that a simple game like pacman

can't it get the sounds dead on? POKEY did. Defender? You have got to be joking.

the POKEY sounds are arcade perfect and far from close on the C64.

 

Because in both of those cases the C64 version was written a year after the machine was released and the Atari version over three years. If two years more experience with a machine hadn't resulted in them getting the sound effects right i'd be worried.

...

You are changing the subject. Pacman Atari is better than Pacman C64 (perioed). NO excuses. Remember we're comparing games as one of the topics here.

 

>>With the right software control, POKEY will outflex SID anyday.

 

>That's a different comparison, if it's just SID versus POKEY without the CPU getting involved then the SID is more flexible but if you're wanting to bring the CPU in to help the SID can also gain benefits from that extra push.

 

Yeah, sure CPU can help both sides to some extent, but ultimately hardware support is better in this case as 4 multifrequency DACs cannot be made up for by software.

 

>The C64 has twice the horizontal resolution for smooth scrolling, games like Io or Slayer move at half a multicolour pixel per frame.

 

Biased answer. If you want to talk scrolling hardware, Atari wins-- it can scroll horizontally and vertically on per text line/graphics line basis with pointers. And it's not so bad to set up two buffers to simulate half color clock scrolling. Your scroll hardware basically is just a 3-bit value for horizontal and vertical and rest is upto software.

 

we are NOT comparing games we are comparing the C64 and A8 hardware capabilities. Pac-Man badly written or THE BEST VERSION EVER POSSIBLE is still only 25% of what the C64 could do at best so just because some dickhead at Atarisoft produced some shovelware hmmmm it's funny that Pac-land on the C64 was done by a non Atari company and is almost arcade perfect and yet Atarisoft couldn't even do a 20 not medly on the SID let alone the graphics hmmm ok. Even with Atarisoft, why does the Buggy look like a squashed turd on the A8 Moon Patrol? That must mean from your argument I can no longer look at any other PM graphics on any games ever again because Atari did such a crap job on your own computers hmmmm...see my point?

 

I could code Pac-Man arcade perfect in a week in a specialised version of Basic if I really wanted to It's not rocket science anymore!

 

As for scrolling well the VIC-II can do megadrive style full screen scrolling ie no character writes after 7 pixel smooth scroll..just moves the memory the same like the megadrive or the Amiga. Mayhem in Monsterland is a classic example of this technique in action and it is no less smooth than any other possible hardware screen scrolling system on any 8bit in any country.

 

 

 

I have found it very interesting, I've discovered games I would never have known about otherwise, and some of the more technical discussions have also been very interesting when they have been kept factual and verifiable.

 

This thread'll die eventually, it's just a matter of time - but another will rise to take it's place, they always do!! [Muahaha!! cough, akk, splutter] i've waved the idea of a forum hosted elsewhere that is dedicated to these sorts of discussions (and more, Amiga versus ST, SNES versus Megadrive, you get the idea) but nobody seems up for it.... shame really, because it sort of seems like a good idea since every 8-bit board or USENet group could greet similar threads with "you want to be reading this site" and those with more delicate sensibilities/blinkers on could stay away.

 

If you REALLY want this just say so and I will make it so. I have spare PHPbb 2.0 hosting I don't mind contributing at all.

 

If anyone wants to suggest topics for it that's fine with me too, I could have it up and running in days.

 

 

> DL vs Raster, it's the same thing, the C64 has scanline accurate timers so it is identical

 

?

show me code to display memory like Apple2 on c64.

 

atari code for ANTIC (no 6502 usage)

 

gr8 equ $f

blank equ $70

jvb equ $41

 

antic dta BLANK,BLANK,BLANK

:192 dta $40+gr8,a(apple_ekr+((#%*$400)+((#%$40)/8)*$80+(#/$40)*$28)

dta jvb,a(antic)

 

 

For some odd reason, C64 people think it's better to just POKE a register and set a graphics mode rather than have a coprocessor let you set various graphics/text modes on a scanline basis and thus save CPU time and memory. They have less CPU time to begin with and they still prefer not having that option.

 

 

It's that river in Egypt again.

 

I have never said that doing things by CPU alone is better than a dedicated Co-Processor to do it. This is why the Amiga is awesome compared to the ST hands down. IF the A8 had SID and Sprites AND ontop of that had 256 palette and DL too and 1.75mhz CPU and modifiable loading roms for disk/tape that would be fantastic. That is a perfect machine that didn't exist. EVERY 8bit machine was a compromise from the PET to the SAM Coupe/Amstrad 464plus range (first and last 8bit). The C64 was the better compromise, that is why it is STILL the worlds best selling unique computer model ever sold by a long shot.

 

But the CPU is only used for multiplexing sprites, which as TMR correctly states is NOT time critical and the VIC-II will complete 'drawing' of any Sprites on screen so you can issue the multiplex at 4 lines from the top of the sprite position vertically speaking. So that really just leaves removing the borders and raster bar type effects which are hardly going to strain the machine.

 

End of the day both the A8 was a compromise as was the C64. I have seen code that makes me decide 16 col 160x200/1mhz/SID+Sample/VIC-II Sprites+scrolling was a better compromise for games of the 80s. I was hoping to see some more gaming examples to make me go 'oooooh' like when I saw A8 Space Harrier but all I get is talk of manky old Atarisoft games and theories about GTIA/Antic modes etc.

 

PM ok for 1979 but not updated and will never be as powerfull as Sprites on VIC-II, so was no 16 color (NOT hues) 160x200 mode. Pokey is alright but only bias can ever describe 1 less channel (although 4 channel sound is normal on SID 3+Samples) on a true analogue synthesizer on a chip with a more feature rich control set and higher frequency range than Pokey with 4 channels and no filters/ring modulation/synchonisations etc is just mad. Doesn't mean the chip is bad but you have to accept Bob Yannes the inventor of Ensonique synthesizers genius. I recognise Jay Miner's genius in 3 machine despite two of them having Atari logos on the box (hell make that 3 Atari machines if you include the Epyx Handy that became the Lynx which was like a mini Amiga)

 

This is indeed futile I should have left this thread to rot as I will now.

 

Just so you know I not only own a lot of this Atari hardware but actually own some pretty damned rare stereo Pokey games too that I choose NOT to flog on ebay but play myself on one of many machines I own. The reason I didn't get a 65XE as a kid was simple..Atari brought out the ST and I wanted to play with Neochrome and because of many hours doing pixel artwork I now work in web-design most of the time doing pixel art for sites. Some people take it far too passionately, and ultimately I agree this thread will never be resolved by the majority. Shame really as you are all stuck with rubbish Winblows now anyway no Atari and no Commodore!!

[atariksi]

I asked the C= guys to bring it to the table, BECAUSE I remain unconvinced that it's the better machine overall.

 

The niches have been identified, and there are some where the C64 rules. There are more of these for the Atari, at this point in the discussion, thus making it the better of the two machines.

 

Game on!

 

Since they are giving an example of 320-pixel scrolling, let's give an Atari scroll example as well-- how about Graphics 1/2 multicolorled text mode which uses more bits of HScrl/VScrl than C64 allows. On Atari you simply do:

 

LDA HScrlVal

STA 54276

LDA VscrlVal

STA 54277

 

After 8..16 color clocks of horizontal scrolling, you update the pointer in the LMS instruction in the DL. After 8..16 scanlines of vertical scrolling, you update pointer of LMS instruction in DL. So let's see how many cycles the C64 can do the equivalent...

[Rybags]

Which is why A8 tapes take 1 hour to load 64k and the C64 takes 5-6 minutes with it's turbo loaders overwriting the tape loader shadowed in RAM from ROM and overwritten/replaced by the programmer. Fairly important to have SOFTWARE turbo tape and disk loaders I think Turbo loader carts only worked with Pirated disk games, you need to replace the CIA chip with a new turbo rom at least for some success in the early days.

 

Maybe you should take a seat on that fence over there.

 

"Replace CIA chip with a new turbo rom" - WTF?!? What possible good could come from putting a ROM where the system expects a dedicated IC?

 

"Fairly important to have SOFTWARE turbo tape and disk loaders I think" - not really. The Atari can read 50K from disk in well under a minute. So, in the day, and even now, the default disk drive speed is adequate.

 

Tape? Well, who cares, really. 25 years ago it might have mattered, but irrespective of that, anyone half serious about computing would have saved for a disk drive. Except maybe the C= owners, because the turbo-tape systems embarrassed their own 1541 owners by sometimes being faster.

 

A8 tapes taking an hour to load? Doubt it. TBH, I haven't used a tape on the Atari for over 15 years. But, I created an 8K cart loader using a software enhanced save system and it loaded in about 45 seconds.

Expand that to something 64K, you're still looking at well under 10 minutes.

Edited April 2, 2009 by Rybags

[atarian63]

Even many of those atari games developed during 1980s using 25%-50% capability are better than C64 games at around same time.

 

That's a subjective matter of opinion - personally, the games are one of the reasons i got a C64 after a year of owning my 800XL to be honest, there was almost nothing i found to be anywhere near as playable as the games i was seeing on a friend's machine, i think Mercenary and Elektraglide were the two exceptions and the majority of titles either existed on both (usually with a better soundtrack, One Man And His Droid, The Last V8 or Thrust as a couple of random examples) or were only on the C64.

 

Another factor was not being able to find a bloody assembler i could A) afford and B) use on a tape-based machine! =-)

 

Most C64 sided people just keep stressing/repeating the same feature of having 8+ sprites on a scanline (X-axis) using 32 colors from a palette of 16 colors.

 

There's a reason for that, the majority of games are 2D so it's a huge plus for the C64 for those titles.

 

I am giving a reasonable answer based on the games I had as compared to the same games on C64 (without getting into hardware technicalities): Super Break Out, Frogger, Pac-man, Donkey Kong, Centipede, Defender and some others. Didn't have a big collection initially since even Defender cost me $50 from Sears.

 

Well, you can stress the same feature but it does not prove a machine superior unless you systematically go through each feature and show software that takes advantage of that feature better than the other machine. And it's not 2D-- it's X-axis. Y-axis is also part of 2D and Atari excels when you start to optimize in that dimension.

 

So your whole argument for which machine is better is based on technically simple games written on limited cartridge memory? LOL well I have a suprise, we went way beyond that level of simplicity on the C64 about a quarter of a century ago

 

...

 

No, I gave one answer where I stated my observations since YOU complained that you don't want to hear "technical" stuff and then you decided to be a hypocrite and start claiming technical things although not correct.

You are reading out of context. The argument was answer to games that were better even in the early years (w/o GTIA).

 

>Well even if we talk about commercial games the Atari A8 wouldn't have a hope in hell of doing the following arcade ...

 

I don't go by my limited experience. Oh, here's a game that's superior on C64-- so C64 is better. Oops, someone recently created/found a better version on Atari. Atari is better. No, they just upgraded the C64 version so C64 is better. Etc. Etc. I rather stick to a more rational approach than yours.

 

>...CPU instruction set is all better on the C64 FACT. PM graphics are just a little better than VCS, and the Pokey has kinda nice style to it but it neither has the frequency range, sophisticated operators or special effects built into the SID. Pokey tunes all kinda sound the same, listen to Panther on the A8 and then on the C64, it is my 'atari fanboy test' track

 

Again going by some limited sample to generalize over entire POKEY. You NEVER read this thread because you are raising the same points without refuting the replies that were made to your points in this thread. CPU instructions work along with ANTIC DL instructions at 1.79Mhz whereas your instruction set is just 6502. As I stated, POKEY can play 68Khz sampled audio on 4 DACs.

 

>The ONLY thing the A8 is better at is total available color palette, shame you can't even get the same 16 colours on screen AT THE SAME TIME as the C64 palette in 160x200 OR with the same amount of multiplexed 24x21 pixeled sprites ...

 

You are BIASED. I am more interested in the truth than your bias toward a machine. "ONLY" colors! I just stated a bunch of things that are superior on A8. You can get all 256 colors on-screen. You can get GPRIOR effects in 160*200 and also do sprite overlays. You are biased in comparing standard mode with a sprite-enhanced mode on the C64.

 

>16 shades of the same colour are a bit useless for most games. The C64 is officially 8 sprites per scanline, it is in the 1983 Programmer's Reference Guide which actually tells you this, it is not TOTAL of 8 just like A8 is not just a total of 4 Missile and 1 Player graphic also by the way.

 

You have a lot to learn if you are going to argue hardware. You have no idea how GTIA modes work. There are three of them and sprites work with them. You can also use GPRIOR in Graphics 10 which is paletted mode-- regardless of what you do to your C64, you won't get this mode. And 16 shades of one color are useful for photographs. Stop calling people names if you haven't even read the thread nor understood the argument. First go back and answer all the remarks in this thread regarding C64 inferiority before you call people names. Once you call people names instead of answering the point, you lose and are no longer interested in the truth...

 

I am so sorry you bought an inferior machine thinking it was superior to A8 but people make mistakes in life and you have to live with it. But you are making things worse for yourself by arguing against reality.

 

Talking about games like Defender or Pac-Man and their rubbish Atarisoft C64 versions (when the VIC-20 versions were suspiciously the best available but the 64 versions were piles of shit it was either on purpose OR they can't program for shit so went bust anyway...oh wait...they did go bust LOL)

 

Inferior in what way....your VCS sounding rubbish Pokey chip? Show me a Pokey playing electric guitar sounds without samples then? No? didn't think so

 

PM's better than Sprites? Oh ok show me a game with a screen full of 100s of PM graphics in 4 colours? No? Oh wait no because PM is shit compared to sprites

 

Graphics? Erm I already said 256 colours is nice but show me one fast action game with ALL 16 colours animated on screen at once like Alleykat or Uridium? No? Oh yes I forgot because you can't do it except for Copper list type raster effects in the background as there is no Char mode screen like the C64s

 

 

SHOW ME SOME EXAMPLES!!

 

Here are 3 more examples of MODERN GAMES BETTER ON THE C64

 

Gauntlet

Druid

Arkanoid (the sound will never be done on any other 8bit computer in the world like that C64 version FACT)

 

Now show me some videos to back up this claim the machine is superior or just go and cry into your technical manuals because there is no video.

 

Show me ONE GAME AS GOOD AS URIDIUM? hmmm where is your hardware super smooth scrolling...I can't see anything faster and smoother or more responsive than Uridium...such a simple game idea but you just can't show me one scrolling game of variable speed like that 1986 classic Uridium oh dear

 

 

But my whole point was that the first game video I posted for Enforcer 2 IS PROOF of what a C64 is graphically capable of and PROOF of the versatility of the SID chip was with a simple non sample using little riff that sounds 99% like an electric guitar using the SID. Of course the SID can do many different sounds without samples which is why the music sounds so diverse and different but that was a simple example of the power of the built in waveforms alone. The point is those two games I showed were giving proof of the machine in action and not theory. If I said 'in theory it is quite possible to get an electric guitar instrument on SID with no sample playback or CPU overhead' nobody would believe me hence I wanted examples in response to my own which I would have been happy to hear with an open mind but this is not happening never mind ho hum.

 

The facts are

 

In your opinion.

 

Pokey is INFERIOR to SID 1 extra channel with waveforms that all sound the same the C64 is 3 with 5 waveform types/3 special effects plus filters PLUS sample channel)

 

If SID is so much better than POKEY, why is it that a simple game like pacman

can't it get the sounds dead on? POKEY did. Defender? You have got to be joking.

the POKEY sounds are arcade perfect and far from close on the C64.

 

Defender is dead on with the Atari, especially the sound and the graphics. The C64

is laughable sound wise....not a good example of SID at all.

 

SID is NOT as flexible as the POKEY, just a lot easier to get it to do CERTAIN things.

Music is one only becasue it would take a lot of work on the coders of an A8 to add

all the ADSR and other SID features. We still have that option.

 

With the right software control, POKEY will outflex SID anyday.

 

 

PM is INFERIOR to Sprites (You can cover the entire screen with Sprites with very little effort, some coders uses sprites for parallax scrolling)

both have H/W

 

Really? show me an example of this. I bet I acn cover a screen bettter with the player than you could

ever hope to with 8 24x16 pixel sprites. 256 color choises verse 16 with the sprites.

 

scrolling but Uridium is FASTER AND SMOOTHER than any A8 scrolling game I have seen EVER.

 

 

This is the kool-Aid talking and tells me you have not seen much on the A8.

One game dont cut it even if this were the case.

 

DL vs Raster, it's the same thing, the C64 has scanline accurate timers so it is identical

 

 

This is beyond laughable. Scanline accurate timers the same thing as display lists? It's now clear you are talking out of your

ass and not from factual information. Show me all the graphic modes on one screen at once like an Atari 8 bit can with a

simple list.....Oh that's right....you can't. You have to write a complicated timer based interrupt scheme and still wont come

close.

 

 

CPU is faster on A8 but 6510 has better instruction set/ optimised version of 6502 A8 uses.

 

 

The 6510 varies from 6502 only in the implementation of 6 I/O ports at addresses 0000 and 0001.

Go do some research before you further make a fool of yourself.

 

Max resolution is the same on both for games (320x200x2 colours or 160x200x4 colour) EXCEPT we have 4 colours per 4x8 pixel block too and you have 16 luminance on XL/XE only in 160x200....I know which one ALL games coders use.

 

Clearly this shows me you dont know a thing about the power and flexibility of the display lists features of the A8.

 

Colour Palette easy win for A8..shame it makes no difference for anything except copper type vertical shading effects under the crappy PM graphics. Wow I can choose my 4 colours from 256 @ 160x200...I'm sure they will be radically different to the perfectly chosen range of 16 colours available on VIC-II huh?

 

I can have any of 256 colors for those 4 colors and not just a paltry choice of 16 colors.

I can also have with the display list many more than four colors on screen and also with simple

interrupt tricks. The C64 cant because it at max has only 16 colors....this was just plain ridiculous

and quite uninformed C64 fan boy on your part. Perfectly chosen range? I want to see violet and

purple and jade sahdes....oh that's right they are not perfect choices so C64 cant use them.

 

Sprites

 

The hardware in the 64 is 8 registers worth of sprites. To show more than 8 sprites on screen

you HAVE to reuse the sprites by quickly moving them. There will never be more than 8 sprites

on screen physically with the C=64. Its an illusion just like with the player missiles of the A8.

 

The difference is the players can have the full height of the screen for images.

 

There are advantages for either hardware here. I like the multi color mode of the C64.

 

4 colour out of 256 when we already have 4 shades or red green blue gray cyan orange blah blah so yeh it doesn't matter if you can only have 4...we can have ALL 16 on screen in 4x8 blocks with ZERO CPU overhead due to the hardware setup

 

If your Pokey is so good why do all the tunes have the same rubbish instruments that sound like Atari VCS stuff? Like I said listen to Panther soundtrack on C64 (sounds unique) and then to the Pokey version for the A8 game of Panther (sounds rubbish and the same baseline as VCS type instrument in all pokey music I hear)

 

Pac-Man tune is perfectly reproduced on other games thanks, why can't the Pokey make the Donkey Kong sound effects perfectly like our Nintendo Licensed Version in the UK NOT programmed by those lame idiots at Atarisoft in 1985? hmmm oh wait it doesn't matter now I bet right? I also pointed out Guardian by Alligata software is a spot on conversion of Defender, it is identical to Defender in sound and graphics NOT the shitty Atarisoft program (which again suspiciously along with PacMan and Galaxians was excellent on Vic20 but rubbish on C64...I wonder why? LOL)

 

As for sprites it is a single value poked into a single register once ever 22nd scanline. If you want to use 1 sprite as a 24x200 pixel unit that is simple, and uses no CPU time at all really, it takes just 5 Pokes to one register per 50 or 60 screen refreshes to have EIGHT 24x200 column sprites in 2 or four colours before H or V expansion tricks We just CHOOSE to multiplex them to have 64 hardware sprites seperate on the screen...which is a little bit more usefull I think No one with multiple brain cells would prefer the PM graphics rubbish over the C64 sprites come on.

 

As for the screen modes then how comes Mayhem in Monsterland has no equal on the A8 for total number of colours on screen? I can't find a single game with the same high quality animation/scrolling/colour graphics as that.

 

I want examples of moderm A8 games that are really pushing the machine..like I said Space Harrier is a good example keep that coming. Stop quoting me shit early 80s games that could probably be reprogrammed for the VIC20 or an MSX or something

 

 

(can't be bothered to read anymore in here, nobody is posting a single game that looks better than Mayhem in Monsterland, Buggy Boy/Turbocharge,Enforcer 2. So that is platform game, shootemup and driving covered)

 

PS If someone had mentioned Encounter on the A8 I would have been impressed, that was actually better than the C64 version and a good fast game as well. The games DO exist but you are all too busy trying to not have an intelligent discussion and getting upset that you miss the gems like Encounter My intention is not to troll but if others want to write unfounded rubbish then carry on. I have posted many examples of modern games that use many features of the C64 be it sprites/char mode gfx for 16 colours/samples or SID waveforms/effects.

 

All I am seeing is upset fanboys writing a load of crap now. If I was a fan boy I wouldn't play the following games exclusively on A8 than any other 8bit machine..

 

RoF (KR and Eidolon are too similar in speed but RoF is better if a slightly lower res so I prefer the speed of it)

Star Raiders

Galaxian (the only 80s arcade game not done better by anyone on the C64...see you just need to think and find the games)

Encounter

 

I just wanted to see more games of the quality of Space Harrier A8 because that truly looks like something pushing the machine properly...not bloody Atarisoft Pacman/Donkey Kong AGAIN when I post awesome 8bit coding skills present in Enforcer 2 (even if it was on another 8bit as true retrogamers you should be in awe of that game's achievements...only a fan boy will look at those 8bit graphics and try and rubbish them just because they are NOT on an A8. Jealousy is no good people...you just miss out on great games. I had an ST and Amiga, I was not stupid enough to miss out on ST Gauntlet 1 (Gauntlet 2 is shit on both and not on Amiga) just because I had an Amiga. You should look at each game on each machine and take it on its merits not steadfastly live in a blinkered A8 world with 1984 quality graphics/sound ok?

Puhleez.. SId audio makes me ill. That cheap sythesized sound. I recentyly aquired one of thes all in one c64 sticks. I hadnt heard those c64 sounds in years. it just grates on me, I cant stand that awful,cheap sound. I collect those little all in one jaks/pacific type games but the c64 one has got to go. Very unpleasant.

[frenchman]

TMR boasts being a hotshot on some average forum, and owning the whole library of Retro Gamer, but does he even read them? Doubt it, not even knowing about the David Crane interview.

So basically TMR has nothing to say.

 

Some geek was mentioning tape loading on Atari XL being 1 hour. so what! Most Atari XL users used fdds for god's sake. UK'ers were tape freaks due to the Spectrum being the kaiser of computers there. C64 guys couldn't afford fdds in UK (ask Mayham, he wrote about it in Retro Gamer). A computer being run loading games from tape is nothing to boast about.

[Allas]

Its simple, Atari have the better scrolling system on any 8bit machine. (include the handling, the possibilities, the flexibility, more saved resources, faster)

Please, don't try to say C64 scroll is better because have 1/320 movement. Believe or not, casual players, didn't take difference on 1/320 and 2/320 movements (obviously, when 2/320 movement is timed adequately)

[atariksi]

...

So if you are enhancing an image with sprite overlays, expect every 20 or so lines to see no enhancements (glitch depending on image).

More non-factual theorising stated as fact. How do you explain those c64 games that multiplex sprites together to create large enemies without any glitching? Reading through some of these posts, it's clear that the way some of you guys perceive the c64 is actually quite different to reality.

...

 

You have a mentality like Oswald taking things out of context to construct a straw-man argument. You can create large enemies because you only have to update the Y-position/shape ptrs during the raster interrupt, but in the case of image enhancement using a mulitcolored overlay-- you need to update x registers, y registers, and shape ptrs which won't fit in one scan line time.

 

Oswald is a superb demo coder...what have you done on the A8 yourself for the world to see?

...

I was talking about Oswald's arguing style as I have seen on AtariAge forums. I did post a demo here in this thread which you never read about since you did not read this thread. See post #2376, Page #96. Hopefully you have an Atari 8-bit to run it on.

 

>we are NOT comparing games we are comparing the C64 and A8 hardware capabilities. Pac-Man badly written or THE BEST VERSION EVER POSSIBLE is still only 25% of what the C64 could do at best so just because some...

 

Follow your own advice which you stated in post #2954:

 

"I don't want to read any nerdy technical possible explanations and theories I want to see the video or hear the sound chip please so we keep it factual and no trolling or flaming thanks "

 

You need to calm down and stop cursing people. We won't confiscate your C64 if you lose any arguments. I am not going to keep replying to you if you keep up with the vulgarity.

 

>End of the day both the A8 was a compromise as was the C64. I have seen code that makes me decide 16 col 160x200/1mhz/SID+Sample/VIC-II Sprites+scrolling was a better compromise for games of the 80s. I was hoping to see some more gaming examples to make me go 'oooooh' like when I saw A8 Space Harrier but all I get is talk of manky old Atarisoft games and theories about GTIA/Antic modes etc.

 

I posted a piece of code that shows 23 colors / scanline and it works for real not theoretically. The demo I gave link to is also working. I'll reply to you when you have read posts rather than come in every few days and blurt out whatever comes on top of your head.